Incorrect address for partnership audit notice did not prevent a final adjustment

Plain-English summary

Chief Counsel considered whether the IRS could issue a final partnership adjustment after failing to mail an initial audit notice to the partnership representative's last known address. The advice concluded that the addressing error was not fatal. The centralized partnership audit rules provide no statutory remedy for that failure, and a final partnership adjustment does not depend on proper issuance of the earlier notice. The partnership also appeared to suffer no prejudice because a later proposed adjustment notice went to the last known addresses of both the partnership and its representative, who likely knew of the audit notice. The memorandum compared the issue to a notice of deficiency, which can remain valid despite an address error when the taxpayer is not prejudiced.

Ruling snapshot

• Question: Does failure to mail a notice of administrative proceeding to the partnership representative's last known address prevent issuance of a final partnership adjustment?
• Outcome: Advice given, the IRS may issue the final partnership adjustment
• Key authorities: IRC §§ 6212(a), 6235; McKay v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 1063 (1987)

Full text (IRS public release)

ID: CCA_2025082209190500 [Third Party Communication:

UILC: 6235B.00-00, 6212.00-00 Date of Communication: Month DD, YYYY]

Number: 202547019
Release Date: 11/21/2025
From: ------------------------
Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2025 7:24:43 AM
To: ----------------------
Cc: ------------------
Bcc:
Subject: RE: EXPEDITE: TSS Assignment Request for assignment to P&A

-----,

The failure to mail the NAP to the Partnership Representative’s (PR) Last Known Address (LKA) is not “fatal” - i.e. it will not prevent the IRS from issuing the FPA – for three reasons. First, BBA does not have statutory remedies for failure to mail the NAP to the LKA. Second, the issuance of the FPA is not tied to the proper issuance of the NAP. Third, the partnership does not appear to have been prejudiced by the failure to send the NAP to the PR’s LKA. Like a section 6212(a) NOD, the NAP, NOPPA, and FPA are not invalid if the IRS does not mail them to the last known addresses. See McKay v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 1063, 1067-68 (1987) (holding that sending NOD to LKA acts as a “safe harbor”, but that a NOD is still valid if Petitioner was not prejudiced by the IRS’ failure to send to the NOD to the LKA). In this case, there does not appear to be any evidence that the partnership was prejudiced – the NOPPA was mailed to the LKA of both the partnership and PR, and the PR likely had actual knowledge of the NAP.

-----------------------
---------------------
-------------------------------------
---------------------